Genetically Modified Organism (GMO) advocates will argue
persistently that anyone who is against allowing GMOs into natural ecosystems
is simply uneducated as to “the science” behind genetic engineering. The truth
is there are thousands of well-educated, organic farmers out there fighting
against Genetic Modification (GM) for legitimate reasons. Unfortunately,
allowing GMOs out into the world has already put their organic crops at risk.
What’s “The Science” Behind GMO’s?
For a long time now, I’ve been lost trying to chase down
exactly what goes on in the process of GM. I was so determined to not be one of
the people that Biotech calls ‘uneducated about the science.’ Then it dawned on
me, this is a dragon I’m chasing. It’s a reductionist, biotech dragon. Knowing
how or not knowing how doesn’t affect my choices, my ethics or the fact that
your business is taking those away from me and millions of other people. To
tell people that you are taking DNA from one species and plugging into another
and then claim that their ethical objections are misinformed because they don’t
understand “how” you’re doing this…that is a smokescreen. Suddenly I am
reminded of “Tiny Classified Ads…It’s Complex.”
The Process
I was able to uncover a basic understanding of what the
process actually is. First of all, this isn’t your momma’s laboratory. Sterile
equipment, pipets, centrifuges, microscopes, test tubes, DNA samples ect. It’s
a far cry from a green field or even a greenhouse just to give you a visual.
There are multiple types of genetic modifications that can
be done on a given crop. Insect resistance (for example: BT), herbicide
resistance (Roundup Ready), nutrient production (Golden Rice) ect. If you have
eaten any non-organic: corn, soy, canola, wheat, products in the last ten years
than you’ve eaten genetically modified food. Keep in mind that corn is in
everything: high fructose corn syrup, xanthan gum, mono-di or triglycerides,
lecithin, citric acid can all be derived from corn (Michael Pollan- Omnivores Dillema). If you’ve had any
meat from a non-local butcher than its likely been fed a diet of pure GMO corn.
It’s scary how quickly this new supposed ‘silver bullet’ penetrated the world
food supply.
It begins with Agrobacterium tumefaciens, a bacteria
that infects plants. Normally this bacteria would cause tumors to grow on the
plant roots, but scientists clean out the bacteria cell and insert a cloned
sequent of DNA of their choosing. For instance, they might insert a DNA
sequence that tells the plant to produce the toxin BT, another bacterium which
kills insect larvae.
They expose the plant to this gene-impregnated bacteria,
which then attaches to the plant DNA and begins to produce the substance of
choice, such as the BT toxin. Another way they do this is the gene gun. This is
basically a Crosman air pistol which shoots transgenic material wrapped around
particles of heavy metal into the plant cells. The heavy metal is strong enough
to penetrate cell membranes and the DNA detaches from the metal and is incorporated
into the plant DNA. These methods are extremely imprecise and regardless which is
used, the organism then produces the substance (BT) within each cell.
With these processes, bioengineers can plug any DNA sequence
from any organism into another organism. They can access
full “scientific creativity” without heeding the barriers between species that
Nature has set up over millennia of evolution; as if it were their
right. With this flawed science it is possible that we could undo those
millennia of evolution in a matter of decades. They don’t stop with just doing
it; they are also intent on selling it. They make claims of humanitarianism as
if they’re going to ‘save the world’ while simultaneously spending millions lobbying
to keep GMO products from being labeled. If it’s going to save the world, it’s not
dangerous and there’s nothing to hide, why don’t you want people to be able to
choose whether or not they want to eat it?
GMO Germplasm
To go on using BT as an example, when plants are engineered
to produce it, the transgenes located within the plant DNA do not recognize
tissue differentiation. So, every single cell within that plant is pumping out
BT whether it’s the root, the leaf or the seed. While we could spray the BT
toxin on our crops all we want, we would never see the toxin within pollen
cells. We do see BT in the pollen of transgenic crops. This means that
transgenics can cross-pollinate with other crops growing miles away…essentially
contaminating organic fields and destroying that wild, locally grown variety.
Once transgenes are out there in open pollination, then there will be no going
back…ever. When Michael Neff, a WSU biotechnology professor and GMO advocate
was asked at the symposium what should be done about this potential risk his
answer was essentially this: Well, I know you’re not going to like hearing it
but I think the only way organic farmers will stay in business is to accept GMO
crops onto their farms. Of course this comment was met with resentful murmurs
throughout a room of organic farmers. Where is the line being drawn between
protecting scientific creativity and destroying the freedom to choose for oneself?
Despite their humanitarian claims, they reveal their true
interests when they destroy small farmers whose crops got contaminated by
transgenics, when they go after universities for conducting experiments of
their own on transgenic crops and when they manipulate and patent Nature’s
bounty as their own ‘intellectual property.’
The Ethical Debate
We cannot use reductionist science to devalue items such as
plants or seeds to an almost in-organic low. During the rise of capitalism,
colonialism and the prevalence of cheap oil, our attitudes toward Mother Nature
became domineering. People looked at Nature’s regenerative cycles as “obstacles.”
Reduction science breaks things down into fragmented, substitutable parts and
claims that an understanding of the parts is the same as an understanding of
the whole. Under this belief system, industrial ‘band-aids’ such as artificial Nitrogen
fertilizer made from petroleum or pesticide made from WWII Nazi gas chamber gas
are justified and praised as ‘elite’ compared to Nature’s primitive
interconnectedness. They completely ignore the fact that killing the soil is
setting off a giant chain reaction which will lead to the destruction of their
own species.
The seed is Nature’s feminine gift of abundant life to us
and all the beings that make up this one organism: Earth. A belief system that
devalues the production of nature and values commoditization also devalues
women and their contributions to societies. According to Vandana Shiva,
"The marginalization of women and the destruction of biodiversity go hand in hand. Loss of diversity is the price paid in the patriarchal model of progress which pushes inexorably towards monoculture, uniformity and homogeneity." Ecofeminism page 166.
Women, being viewed as the 'second sex', have an innate link with diversity and differences. The struggle for social equality and the ecological struggle to protect biodiversity is essentially the same; a struggle against the hierarchies and mono-cultures of capitalism. Women do such a variety of work that it is immeasurable, and labeled by patriarchal economists as 'outside the so-called production boundary.' This is interpreted as non-productive. In the same way, a bio-diverse food forest is viewed as not as productive because it doesn't produce as much corn as a monoculture. But, in calorie and nutrient content...the food forest produces much larger quantities, its just not all corn...it's also tubers, beans and fruits and greens and animals products ect.
Under
the laws of capitalism, anything that reproduces on its own without paying tax to
the big guys is a threat. In a culture that uses the metaphors of ‘machines’ to
describe the totally organic and sacred processes of Nature; also uses these
metaphors when speaking of human reproduction and in doing that distances women
from their own ‘expertise’ regarding their bodies. This is what ecofeminism tries
to address: a type of consciousness that disconnects us from an integrated
whole understanding of life and our place in it. It empowers the few who
control it and depraves the rest of us of information.
Genetic Modification reduces Nature’s whole to substitutable
parts without regard for the true consequences. Biotech companies completely
ignore millions of people’s ethical and spiritual objections under reductionist
justifications thereby devaluing those people, women and Nature.
Why are we facing global famine? Are we?
According to Ethical
Issues in Biotechnology; By Richard Sherlock, John D. Morrey,
“There is no relationship between the prevalence of hunger in a given country and its population. For every densely populated and hungry nation like Bangladesh or Haiti, there is a sparsely populated and hungry nation like Brazil or Indonesia. The world today produces more food per inhabitant than ever before. Enough food is available to provide 4.3 pounds for each person every day: 2.5 pounds of grain, beans and nuts, about a pound of meat, milk and eggs and another of fruit and vegetables. The real causes of hunger are poverty, inequality and lack of access to food and land.” (page 10)
The problems that large agrotech companies claim GMO’s will
solve were created by those very same agrotech companies…it’s a system that was
designed to do nothing but produce as much as fast as possible, there is no
regard for ecological welfare.
Permaculture, polyculture, synergistic and holistic farm
management practices, bioactive farming and other versions what I call “true
ecosciences” have proven themselves in recent years to be as productive or even
more so than conventional agriculture.
They incorporate a harmonious balance of ever diversifying
species to produce a variety of nutrient sources. These holistic systems are simple and
do-able. They do not require the farmer to import oil or chemicals but instead encourage a harmonious relationship with the farmland and soil. They are teachable to all people, so that even the poorest or most
isolated can be food secure. They do not make mass profits, they do not
centralize control over a global food supply.
Here is Bill Moyers talking with Vandana Shiva on
Genetically Modified Seeds:
Scientific American: Can Genetically Modified Crops Feed the
World? Genetic modification has been touted as a solution to hunger, but does
it really boost yields?; David Biello.
Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute: Genetic Engineering of Crop Plants
Spiral
Ridge Permaculture; Regenerative Farming
Systems: http://www.spiralridgepermaculture.com/2012/09/24/regenerative-farming-systems-soil-biology-part-1/
Genetically Engineering Plants for
Crop Improvement: CHARLES S. GASSER AND ROBERT T. FRALEY
Journal
of Biological Education: Volume 27, Issue 4, 1993: Biotechnology and genetic engineering: students' knowledge and
attitudes
Agriculture
and Human Values: March 1998, Volume 15, Issue 1, pp 15-30: The influence of initial attitudes on
responses to communication about genetic engineering in food production
No comments:
Post a Comment